If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

why do so many people say the giants always draft BPA?

I see this being said a lot and reese's track record doesn't seem to support this claim. however, I wouldn't go as far as to say he reaches on players. I think he just finds a good mix of need/value.

in 2008 we lost gibril, he drafts Kenny Phillips
in 2009 we lost plax, he drafts Hakeem Nicks
in 2012 we lost Jacobs, drafts Wilson, lost ross, drafts hosley, lost manningham, drafts randle

i just want people to realize that it's OKAY to fill your needs through the draft as long as you're not reaching too far for a guy. it seems like too many people mindlessly come out and state "BPA no matter what!!" which is a simple minded way of thinking.

let's say you're picking at #20 in the draft and you need a CB really bad and you have him ranked #25 on your value chart. but then there's an OT who's rated #15 on your value board, but you're all set at that position. i really don't think there's THAT much of a difference in value from the 15-25 area.

i just want people to realize that sometimes if you really need a guy at a certain position, it's not the worst thing to take the guy rated a little bit lower. i think it's more important to draft for value in the later rounds since teams are less likely to fill a crucial need with a low round pick.

this is not to imply that we shouldn't have drafted JPP (since i know this argument will be brought to the table) just because we had plenty of DE's. if you really have a conviction on a guy the way reese and our FO did with JPP and think he's an enormous talent too good to pass up, then by all means go for it.

but if it's a situation like i described before with taking a slightly lower valued player because he fulfills a big need, it's not a bad thing like so many people make it out to be.

I see this being said a lot and reese's track record doesn't seem to support this claim. however, I wouldn't go as far as to say he reaches on players. I think he just finds a good mix of need/value. in 2008 we lost gibril, he drafts Kenny Phillips in 2009 we lost plax, he drafts Hakeem Nicks in 2012 we lost Jacobs, drafts Wilson, lost ross, drafts hosley, lost manningham, drafts randle i just want people to realize that it's OKAY to fill your needs through the draft as long as you're not reaching too far for a guy. it seems like too many people mindlessly come out and state "BPA no matter what!!" which is a simple minded way of thinking. let's say you're picking at #20 in the draft and you need a CB really bad and you have him ranked #25 on your value chart. but then there's an OT who's rated #15 on your value board, but you're all set at that position. i really don't think there's THAT much of a difference in value from the 15-25 area.

Jerry Reese has said he would gladly pick up a BPA and then find a place for him when their number is called.

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1

I see this being said a lot and reese's track record doesn't seem to support this claim. however, I wouldn't go as far as to say he reaches on players. I think he just finds a good mix of need/value.

in 2008 we lost gibril, he drafts Kenny Phillips
in 2009 we lost plax, he drafts Hakeem Nicks
in 2012 we lost Jacobs, drafts Wilson, lost ross, drafts hosley, lost manningham, drafts randle

i just want people to realize that it's OKAY to fill your needs through the draft as long as you're not reaching too far for a guy. it seems like too many people mindlessly come out and state "BPA no matter what!!" which is a simple minded way of thinking.

let's say you're picking at #20 in the draft and you need a CB really bad and you have him ranked #25 on your value chart. but then there's an OT who's rated #15 on your value board, but you're all set at that position. i really don't think there's THAT much of a difference in value from the 15-25 area.

i just want people to realize that sometimes if you really need a guy at a certain position, it's not the worst thing to take the guy rated a little bit lower. i think it's more important to draft for value in the later rounds since teams are less likely to fill a crucial need with a low round pick.

this is not to imply that we shouldn't have drafted JPP (since i know this argument will be brought to the table) just because we had plenty of DE's. if you really have a conviction on a guy the way reese and our FO did with JPP and think he's an enormous talent too good to pass up, then by all means go for it.

I think you might be defining BPA too literally. By the time pick 32 rolls around, there is a lot of answers as to who is the BPA. And the pick is dependent on who is left.

If I remember this correctly, the Giants had their eye on Randle as the first pick, assuming that Wilson would be gone. He was left, BPA on their boards, so they took him.
And they had no expectation that Randle would be there 31 picks later, but they took him too as the BPA.

"I was disappointed that Eli did not lead his team in that brawl. I'm not saying I would have completely lost respect for him as a leader if I were on the squad but that kind of suspect behavior would definitely have me eyeing him sideways"...elitikistrahan

Jerry Reese has said he would gladly pick up a BPA and then find a place for him when their number is called.

with respect, id have to say that all GM's say they draft BPA. for the most part, i don't think they want to admit that they drafted based on need. it can make them appear to be reaching for a guy which they'll never tell anyone even if it's true. it can also hurt the player drafted thinking they were the 2nd option.

for instance, everyone said the bucs stole doug martin from the giants and that we drafted wilson out of need. now, i wont be so arrogant as to say reese was lying because none of us know for sure. but i doubt any GM would come out and say "yea, that team got our guy".

and even if we did draft wilson because we needed a rb, i wouldn't have a proble with it. we needed another rb and it's not like we reached for him.

I think you might be defining BPA too literally. By the time pick 32 rolls around, there is a lot of answers as to who is the BPA. And the pick is dependent on who is left.

If I remember this correctly, the Giants had their eye on Randle as the first pick, assuming that Wilson would be gone. He was left, BPA on their boards, so they took him.
And they had no expectation that Randle would be there 31 picks later, but they took him too as the BPA.

i see what you're saying. it seems like the giants get pretty lucky sometimes with high value players dropping to them like prince, randle, KP, etc and coincidentally they all filled a need. that's why i think reese is good at drafting players with a good mix of BPA/need.

Two years ago everyone thought they where going OL because they did need some help. When Prince was there at 19 it was an easy pick to make as be was the BPA.

well prince was ranked top 10 and fell to us at 19 i believe? but yea we also needed a CB too (cant have enough good ones). when a player drops way lower than he should have like prince or rueben, then yes you take him.

to further clarify my point, im just trying to debunk the theories that jerry reese drafts strictly BPA like a lot of people seem to think.

I see this being said a lot and reese's track record doesn't seem to support this claim. however, I wouldn't go as far as to say he reaches on players. I think he just finds a good mix of need/value.

in 2008 we lost gibril, he drafts Kenny Phillips
in 2009 we lost plax, he drafts Hakeem Nicks
in 2012 we lost Jacobs, drafts Wilson, lost ross, drafts hosley, lost manningham, drafts randle

i just want people to realize that it's OKAY to fill your needs through the draft as long as you're not reaching too far for a guy. it seems like too many people mindlessly come out and state "BPA no matter what!!" which is a simple minded way of thinking.

let's say you're picking at #20 in the draft and you need a CB really bad and you have him ranked #25 on your value chart. but then there's an OT who's rated #15 on your value board, but you're all set at that position. i really don't think there's THAT much of a difference in value from the 15-25 area.

i just want people to realize that sometimes if you really need a guy at a certain position, it's not the worst thing to take the guy rated a little bit lower. i think it's more important to draft for value in the later rounds since teams are less likely to fill a crucial need with a low round pick.

this is not to imply that we shouldn't have drafted JPP (since i know this argument will be brought to the table) just because we had plenty of DE's. if you really have a conviction on a guy the way reese and our FO did with JPP and think he's an enormous talent too good to pass up, then by all means go for it.

but if it's a situation like i described before with taking a slightly lower valued player because he fulfills a big need, it's not a bad thing like so many people make it out to be.

I completely agree with this post.

We have often drafted to need in the JR era. Not always but often.

-Aaron Ross was definitely a need at corner.
-KP was a need at safety
-Nicks was a need at WR
-JPP was NOT a need pick and was def. BPA
-Prince was NOT really a need pick (he dropped to us and we couldn't resist)
- Wilson was a need pick.

So JR has gone both ways but the perception that we always go BPA is wrong.